Evidence for Bush Electronic Voting Fraud in Florida?

Written November 21. 2004, at 15:00 GMT.

University of California Berkeley: The Effect of Electronic Voting Machines on Change in Support for Bush in the 2004 Florida Elections by Michael Hout, Laura Mangels, Jennifer Carlson, and Rachel Best.

Summary:

  • Irregularities associated with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000 excess votes or more to President George W. Bush in Florida.

  • Compared to counties with paper ballots, counties with electronic voting machines were significantly more likely to show increases in support for President Bush between 2000 and 2004. This effect cannot be explained by differences between counties in income, number of voters, change in voter turnout, or size of Hispanic/Latino population.

  • In Broward County alone, President Bush appears to have received approximately 72,000 excess votes.

  • We can be 99.9% sure that these effects are not attributable to chance.

See also:


More like this: English Entries, .


Reader Comments (7)

  1. Jósi replies:

    The president of Diebold, the company that makes the mysterious voting machines that were used is a big Republican party supporter. These voting machines are typical closed-source computers. Only Diebold knows how they work.

    November 21. 2004 kl. 16:56 GMT | #

  2. Gunnar replies:

    the.truth.is/counting/ - links on the subject...

    November 21. 2004 kl. 22:16 GMT | #

  3. Borgar replies:

    As I understand this; they have used past election data to calculate a predicted outcome for this year and found that it doesn't match this years election outcome.

    Now, I don't like Bush any more than I like innocent people shot in the head at close range... BUT.... This doesn't prove that the electronic voting machines were cheating. It only shows us that there "might be" something wrong. It could be that voting machines are off, it could be that past elections were off, or both. There are also more things to consider. For example: high turnout, first time usage of electronic machines, etc...

    Fact remains that no one knows what the hell these machines were doing. There is no paper trail to verify anything. The code from the machines should be open to the public. There has to be a paper trail. There should be an investigation.

    But all these things are easy for me to say. I am not American, merely a shocked observer of their politics (or possibly a victim of their foreign policy). I don't pretend I know any better how to run their country and/or elections. To do so would be to take on their single most hated characteristic.

    All we can do is point out to them that were this to occur in our country we would most certainly demand an investigation. I pity the poor Americans, living under a fascist totalitarian regime. :-(

    November 22. 2004 kl. 11:09 GMT | #

  4. Adrienne replies:

    oh Borgar. You are being deliberately obtuse, here. Although we don't know what those machines were doing, we do know that

    • the machines are operated and maintained by privately owned companies, who all have easily traceable political leanings.

    • over and over again, Democratic states report dramatic upset victories by Republicans when electronic voting is adopted.

    This is a nice, enraging article. There is enough evidence of foul play to demand an investigation, but who is going to ask for it? We the People don't have much say it seems, especially now that it is a one-party government:

    November 23. 2004 kl. 12:47 GMT | #

  5. Már replies:

    Adrienne, According to Electoral-vote.com recount is already underway in both Ohio and New Hampshire, requested by the Libertarian and Green parties, and Ralph Nader respectively.

    As Mr. Tanenbaum points out:

    "If nothing else, these recounts will give us two data points for the popular vote in each state so we will be able to compute the standard deviations. We are all used to the concept of margin of error caused by the statistical sampling used in polls, but it may take some getting used to if there is a substantial statistical error in counting the actual votes."

    November 23. 2004 kl. 17:30 GMT | #

  6. Már replies:

    Borgar wrote in #3 above:

    As I understand this; they have used past election data to calculate a predicted outcome for this year and found that it doesn't match this years election outcome.

    Borgar, you seem to misunderstand.

    What they did was to analyze, for each Florida county, the difference between the 2000 and 2004 election outcomes (and other data) to see if there was any statistically significant correlation between voting method (i.e. electronic vs. paper ballots) and the amount by which the election outcome varied in each county.

    Their results indicate that there seems to be something about the electronic voting machines that caused republicans to get a better outcome than if the votes were cast with paper ballots. Surely this sounds/smells/is fishy.

    Next question should be: what caused this, and who's to blame?

    November 23. 2004 kl. 17:59 GMT | #

  7. Már Örlygsson: More US Election Fraud Evidence?

    "This in following my earlier blog post on the subject: Scoop: Complete US Exit Poll Data Confirms Net Suspicions "In the data [...] we can see that 42 of the 51 states in the union swung towards George Bush while..." Read more

    November 27. 2004 kl. 02:50 GMT | #

Ţessum svarhala hefur veriđ lokađ. Kćrar ţakkir til ţeirra sem tóku ţátt í umrćđunni.


 

Flakk um vefsvćđiđ



 

Nýleg svör frá lesendum

  • Rich (Req.js - javascript lazy-loading and dependency managment made easy)
  • Rich (Req.js - javascript lazy-loading and dependency managment made easy)
  • Rich (Req.js - javascript lazy-loading and dependency managment made easy)
  • Már (Req.js - javascript lazy-loading and dependency managment made easy)
  • Rich (Req.js - javascript lazy-loading and dependency managment made easy)
  • Már (Req.js - javascript lazy-loading and dependency managment made easy)
  • Dinesh (Req.js - javascript lazy-loading and dependency managment made easy)
  • Már (Taubleyjur í nútímanum - lítill leiđarvísir handa hrćddri ţjóđ)
  • Ada (Taubleyjur í nútímanum - lítill leiđarvísir handa hrćddri ţjóđ)
  • notandi (Taubleyjur í nútímanum - lítill leiđarvísir handa hrćddri ţjóđ)
  • Geir (Lausnin á efnahagsvandanum)
  • Jenný (Lausnin á efnahagsvandanum)
  • Óli Jens (Lausnin á efnahagsvandanum)
  • Már (Lausnin á efnahagsvandanum)
  • Kjartan S (Lausnin á efnahagsvandanum)

 

 

Yfirlit yfir ţetta skjal

(Atriđin í listanum vísa á ákveđna kafla ofar á síđunni.)